MED REHAB THERAPY CENTER INC.
v.
DIRECT GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Med Rehab Therapy Center has standing to intervene in the litigation because its interest is of such a direct and immediate character that it will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.
[1] A party seeking to intervene in litigation must demonstrate an interest in the subject matter or property involved that is of such a direct and immediate character that t…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“of such a direct and immediate character that [they] will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment”
Standard for intervention under Florida law, cited from Union Central Life Insurance Co. v. Carlisle
Med Rehab Therapy Center sought to intervene in a lawsuit between another party and Direct General Insurance Company. The trial court denied the motio…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
Based on the appellee’s proper confession of error, we reverse the order denying the appellants’ motion to intervene because the appellants’ interest in the litigation is “of such a direct and immediate character that [they] will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.” Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505, 507 (Fla. 1992) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)); see also Accident911 Help Med. Ctr. Corp. v. Direct Gen. Ins. Co., 48 Fla. L. Weekly D1700 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 23, 2023).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (57 total)
-
Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 1992)…n to, and in recognition of, the propriety of the main proceeding, unless otherwise ordered by the court in its discretion. The test to determine what interest entitles a party to intervene is set forth in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234, 238-39, 78 So. 14, 15 (1918): [T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene ... must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the j…
-
Peoples Bank of Jacksonville v. Bridge, 94 Fla. 474 (Fla. 1927)…ll v. Taggart, 29 U. S. 190, 7 L. Ed. 828; Schillinger v. Arnott, 14 N. Y. S. 326; Clark v. Reyburn, 19 (U. S.) L. Ed. 354; Brown v. Brown, 86 Tenn. 316, 7 S. W. 643; Doke v. Williams, 45 Fla. 248, 251, 34 So. 569; Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 235, 78 So. 14; Kerreson v. Stewart, 23 (U. S.) L. Ed. 846; William v. Morgan, 111 U. S. 684, 20 L. Ed. 559; 15 Encyc. of Pldg. & Prac. 636, 637; Everett v. Edwards (Mass.), 5 L. R. A. 112. On the other hand, it is contended by the appellee Bridge Company that und…
-
Switow v. Sher, 136 Fla. 284 (Fla. 1939)…nder it necessary to depart therefrom in order to avoid irreparable injury.” The record in the instant case shows that the original complainant, cross-defendant Switow, is a non-resident. ■ In the case of Morgareidge v. Howey, et al., 75 Fla. 234, 78 Sou. 14, we held: • “The interest which will entitle a person to intervene must be in the-matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgme…
Previewing 3 of 57 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 (Fla. 1918)
- Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 1992)